More on my fiction writing

August 01, 2016

It can happen here

Clowns who say outrageous things, who are completely unqualified for office, are very capable of being elected in America. They are entertaining, underestimated, and disasters in office. The highest office reached so far has been governor — think Jesse Ventura in Minnesota and Lester Maddox in Georgia. Closer to home was Evan Mecham, the governor of Arizona from 1987 until he was impeached and removed from office less than 15 tumultuous months later.

Mecham was a clown, given to conspiracy theories and outrageous statements — his "pickanniny" comment and blaming working women for high divorce rates were only two. But he had support from the state's right wing, especially John Birchers and fellow Mormons. He was a populist, after his fashion. In Mecham's world, the government was the enemy and cause of all ills. He wanted to eliminate income taxes and turn over the public's lands to state interests. A theocrat, Mecham wanted to have prayer in public schools. Threats were everywhere, out to destroy real Americans and the real America.

The toupee'd Glendale car dealer and serially failed newspaper publisher gave Carl Hayden a scare in the 1962 U.S. Senate race. Among his issues was a demand that the United States withdraw from the United Nations. Hayden's longtime aide Roy Elson organized a campaign to "reintroduce" the senator to a state he had served in Washington since 1912, but had attracted large numbers of newcomers since 1956. Hayden won comfortably, but many old Arizonans were unsettled. That anyone could get 45 percent of the vote against the state's indispensable man in the fight for the Central Arizona Project was astounding and deeply disturbing.

Mecham ran outsider campaigns for governor again four times before winning. As in 1962, each election he explicitly ran an insurgent campaign against elites and "the establishment."

His election was a fluke. In the 1986 Republican primary, he faced the respected state House leader Burton Barr, who was supported by the establishment, from Barry Goldwater to the Pulliam press. But Barr, a legislative wizard, ran a sluggish campaign. Turnout was the lowest in 40 years. And Mecham cleverly exploited the grievances and paranoia of newcomer retirees, adding to his Bircher and LDS base — people who did vote. On the Democratic side, and back then Arizona was a competitive state, Carolyn Warner was sandbagged by apartment magnate Bill Schultz, who got out of the race only to reemerge as an independent.

Forty percent of the vote was enough to put Mecham in the governor's office.

When Mecham was defenestrated, it was not a case of an upright paladin of the people, truth teller and the "Only I" who could save the state and nation being done in by the secret machinations of the evil establishment. Mecham did himself in, quite publicly.

To be sure, it was a different era. Arizona still had major headquarters and powerful civic stewards with personal stakes in the good of the state. The vast right-wing infrastructure had not yet reached the state level to the degree of today, where a national agenda of the private school racket, private prison racket, tax cut racket, and other hustles are implemented by dark money and slick "businessman-governors." The likes of Burt Barr and Paul Fannin (a real businessman turned governor and senator) would be horrified. What would Ev think?

[The real-estate developer] is tapping into much of the stew that goes back to Mecham and even before. A couple of things have changed. First, the Republican Party has become one flavor of extremist crazy and [the real-estate developer] says out loud what most of its members think but keep to themselves. And he adds his own distinctive, and often contrary to the party line, statements. Coming from someone who did not have what writer Ron Fournier calls the developer's "mendacity, megalomania, intolerance, and intellectual slovenliness," a few even have appeal.

Among the many things [the real-estate developer] has said is more solid support for infrastructure and passenger trains than has ever come from Hillary Clinton. I think it was a mistake to extend NATO to Russia's borders and "free riders" in the alliance are a problem. The Iraq war was a mistake. Political correctness is sometimes used to silence opponents and automatically invalidate their viewpoints. Can we keep admitting so many immigrants forever in a warming, destabilized world and wonder, at the least, why wages don't rise?

The trouble is, aside from the first point above, every other way [the real-estate developer] addresses these issues is with the scary tools of the demagogue. That he doesn't read books scares me even more — even W read books. He would appoint the extremist-right judges easily confirmed by a GOP Senate. He denies mainstream science on climate. And he would have the vastly expanded national-security powers of the presidency. All this makes him an existential threat to the republic. He cannot be allowed to win.

Yet he might. Clowns win. Evan Mecham was not a reality television star in a nation of vidiots. But Mecham slid into office in a splintered election. This year, we'll also see how many Americans want to waste a vote on Jill Stein or write in Bernie's name to show their own personal purity. Don't look for salvation in 2020, when America rises up as one liberal tide. Instead, I suspect a President Trump would pull a Mecham, with more dire consequences. He would then be impeached and removed by his own party — or by a military coup. Avoiding this, he would become the kind of strongman he admires around the world and 2020 will just be a year on the calendar.

AFTERWORD: As [the real-estate developer] continues with his outrageous statements, I have another thought. Right now, the Republicans are just focused on keeping Congress so they can impeach Hillary and prepare to win the White House in 2020. But what if [the developer] does a complete meltdown. Was Joe Scarborough telling the truth when he quoted a source saying [the developer] has asked why we don't use the nukes if we have them? Or is this the first step in removing him in favor of Paul Ryan. In many ways, the Speaker is more dangerous because he is considered a "serious" thinker and policy wonk by the media elites. Yet Ryan is in reality an extremist and the single most influential person behind the "austerity" that has so hurt the economy. A troubling thought.

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Trump does deny climate change. Ironically, his proposal for "railroads of the future" (and the City of Phoenix's proposal to plant more trees) would probably do more in a positive sense than any "tax on carbon"--any meaningful level of which is the liberal equivalent of illegal immigrant expulsion in terms of its likelihood of being implemented.

Anyway, this election is Hillary's to lose. By all accounts, she should have had it "in the bag" by now. This poster, like many more Republicans than the Democrats suspect, is not adverse to ticket splitting (Whoever opposes Arpaio in the General Election always gets my vote). The problem is not Trump, the problem is Hillary. Everything Trump has done--from trivializing the family members of those lost in combat (Benghazi in her case) to ridiculing persons with disabilities (special needs children in Arkansas in her case)--Hillary has also done. Then she lies about it--and just about everything else.

People assert that Trump is a "psychopath", but Hillary is a pathological liar--isn't that much the same thing?

Anyway, Trump's peccadilloes--and there are plenty of those--are a symptom of the problem. The problem is the media.

The "mainstream media" carefully managed the amount of publicity--or lack thereof--given the candidates during the primaries to all but ensure that Trump would be nominated--not only guaranteeing, in their eyes, a Democrat victory in November but compromising the Republican Party in the bargain. What the media didn't plan on is that their own candidate might prove to be even more unappealing than Trump.

The statement that anything one of the candidates has done, the other has, as well, and then lied about it, would be ridiculous in almost any election. Statements like these have been flung wildly this election cycle without recognition of any need to back them up.
If this was considered a fine way for humans to treat each other, there would be no Better Business Bureau or anti-bullying programs in the schools.
This kind of behavior makes it even less likely that reasonable people of any political persuasion will do us the favor of running for office.
If this really is the new normal, send in the clowns.

Jon said, "This year, we'll also see how many Americans want to waste a vote on Jill Stein or write in Bernie's name to show their own personal purity."

Speaking of "Strongman" the above quote seems to imply an intellectual strongman arm twisting, to threaten this moron into not writing in Bernie.
I have no fear of a liberal uprising.
"With revolution awareness is born."
So Better than clown Trump we get Hillary who will get us more than one supreme court justice and a few other "liberal" tokens. But Bernie Sanders will eventually be known as the father of the coming progressive revolution.

Sometimes, planets align in an unusual way and give us all odd choices (and outcomes) in elections. Third party candidates, previous administrations, luck, turnout, and timing can all play a part.

Two recent examples are Carter in 1976 (when Ford pardoned Nixon, no Republican was going to win that election) and, of course, the anti Bush sentiment in 2008 and 2009 that assured the Democrats of the White House no matter who they nominated (and we wound up with, well, what we wound up with).

If you've read Caro's books on LBJ, it's almost a lock that some (most??) of LBJ's early Texas victories were, at a minimum, dishonest. And without those and Kennedy being murdered, LBJ probably never becomes President.

I would be very very afraid if I were counting on Hillary to win {I do).
I have always cited the fact that Arizona elected Evan amd continues to elect Sheriff Joke as proof of the poorly informed and largely undereducated electorate.

Never underestimate the stupidity of the American public.
See my previous comment referring to Forrest Gump.

All the major progressive steps forward in the last 100 or so years: minimum wage, 40 hour work week, Social Security, GI Bill, integration, civil rights, voting rights, OSHA, ADA, Medicare/Medicaid, women's rights, gay rights, the ACA, have come about through "messy" fights against reactionary inertia.

Ugliness, of course, is in the eyes of the beholder.

And I guess if you are blindly stuck in your ways, then everything new can seem ugly.

Obama was amazing considering nearly everything he tried to do got put down by "White" guys and they didn't even bother to put thier white hoodie's and robes on.

George W won a "second term." The country would have been a lot better off had his parents bought him a bicycle shop and he never ran for office. And even though some believe he should be prosecuted for the Americans and Iraqis that died. I'm not sure he really grasped what he was led into by the liars around him.

I'm hoping before Obama leaves he puts millions more acres in Roadless Wilderness and puts "All drugs under the FDA".

Be interesting if Hillary picks him for the Supreme court. White god wold go really crazy, with a Black Communist Muslim on the bench.

Trump Spokesperson blames Obama for death of American soldier, Humayun Khan .
Khan was killed in 2004 in Iraq, protecting fellow soldiers from a car bomb. You might recall that Obama did not take office until 2009.

Wonder if American soldier, Humayun Khan, a Muslim was related to
Genghis Khan was a tengrist, but was religiously tolerant and interested in learning philosophical and moral lessons from other religions. He consulted Buddhist monks, Muslims, Christian missionaries, and the Taoist monk Qiu Chuji.

Trump's ascendency can be, at least in part, ascribed to what I call the "neo ugly American."

The original "ugly American" was the loud, boorish, world traveler of the 1950's and 60's that had no idea of the local customs when they vacationed. Their uncultured behavior gave us a bad name.

The reason I bring this up is because a huge portion of the Republican electorate consists of this bold and obnoxious mindset that has no interest in other people's sensibilities. I believe this flows from the Republican party becoming increasingly reactionist, uncooperative, and intransigent. When you factor in how the "evangelicals" and religious storm-troopers have hijacked "faith," you have a perfect storm of divinely-inspired rebellious zealots. Their current behaviors mirror Trump's extremism in both style and content.

Another part of this divinely inspired thinking is that their wants are to be accorded them because God is on their side--and those opposing them are Godless liberals-socialists-communists.

While they may not be the majority, remember the saying, "Those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it."

The people you mention in the Hillary piece are not in a position to make agreements that either bind, or potentially bind, America to a course of action. Obviously, none of them are in a position to be elected president.

While "treason" being applied to those you mention is uncertain, Trump's actions, by his stature as the nominee, wholly fit my definition of "high" treason.

Does Trump's behavior (toward Putin) remind anyone of a 21st century "Manchurian Candidate?"

@ Bradley: read “Clinton Cash” by Peter Schweizer and get back to be on the treason thing.

Trump as Putin’s sock puppet – yeah that’s really a hoot. I think the root of the meme is the hacking of the DNC email system. All we know is somebody hacked it. That’s all. The Russians are just one of many that might have been motivated to do it. Just as plausible is that it was an inside job. We’ll probably never know.

Just an aside, put much to do about the ole, whites anger problem. Well, being an old white male, I can tell that I certainly do have a lot of anger. If Burney Sanders is indicative, there’s a lot of anger among white young people and lefties in general. Seems to be a lot of anger in blacks also. I’m sure there’s a segment out there that’s not angry. I think we’re correct. If the present situation doesn’t anger you, you’re just not thinking about it enough. I don’t really there’s that much difference among us about what we find troubling. The differences are in which aspect of the problem is salient and the best remedies might be.

Maybe Anonymous fans of Bernie hacked the Democrats and gave it to Julian? And they framed the Russians. I think I saw that in an Elementary episode. Sherlock is everywhere. Can he trust Doctor Lucy Lu Watson. I hear she is a North Korean spy.
Interesting how (as usual)the FBI sat on the hacking until the last minute. Oh maybe they are In bed with Putin and Trump.

Dudas, Terrible how you have suffered under Manchurian Obama. Can't wait to see what Hillary does to U. But hold on Putin and the FBI, Trump and Assange may save U by taking out Hillary. Now all they have to do is to get rid of Bernie. Maybe they will give him a choice, Exile in Norway or ????.

Ms Dudas, it's good to know that you don't personally suffer. But I bet you're a carrier.

Now that we sorted all that out, getting back to that sad "ethical pygmy" Ev Mecham.

Interesting that he only got slightly more than 40% of the vote. If my math is correct, and I went to an Arizona public school, that means nearly 60% voted against him. So, I guess the question is "what the hell has happened to the Arizona Democratic Party since then?"

Let's face it, Latinos didn't vote in great numbers then, either.

So where did all those Dems go?

One answer is that they run uninspiring ciphers like Eddie Basha, "nice guys" with no passion like Fred DuVal, everybody's favorite smug technocrat, Harvard's own "don't break a sweat campaigning" Terry Goddard, and so on.

B franklin, in my 76 year old senile opinion;
of the almost 7 million people in az, 500,000 people have a lock on 35 percent of the votes cast. All they need is 16 percent more to insure thier candidate wins.

That aside I'm willing to bet regardless of Dudas tone, votes his or her's conciousness.

As we work our way to November here is a high five to Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, Julian Assange,Daniel Ellsberg, Robert Merritt and Mark Felt.

"HILL"?
Hillary was born is the flatland of Chicago?
the White house sets on a HIll?
Hill is for the backwoods, of?
Sorry Dudas U lost me, as I did lose my car yesterday. luckily my neighbors found it.

The problem is we all get caught up in the little things and fail to see the "big picture."

I think you are comparing oranges to watermelons if you are trying to equate the Clinton's profiteering to Trump cozying up to Putin. Especially if you consider the potential destabilizing effect of each on not just the U. S.,
but the entire world.

@Bradley: I’m going to need some enlightenment on the Trump and Putin being “best buds”. I know they share some personality traits. I seem to recall he what somewhat complementary of Russia’s economic performance relative to the utter corruption of the previous rulers.

It would seem a more harmonious relationship between the Russian Union and the U.S. would be a good thing and hardly “destabilizing”.

Geez, WKG, what U want is at your fingertips called google. Trump is worth maybe a little more than 4 billion. Putin is worth 70 Billion. So the love fest is obvious and its obvious who is on top. Trump cant even wrestle let alone handle a black belt cowboy.

I think the current US administration and NATO have been screwing over Russia quite frequently and with our CIA children we knocked out a duly elected Ukrainian leader and put our puppet strong man in. ( for $$$$)

Of course we did the same thing in Egypt to the legally elected Muslim Brotherhood candidates.

So folks we must rid the planet of Putins and oh yea Muslims and Mexicans. When Hillary gets elected she can make,
The Donald ambassador to Russia.

Thanks Jerry for the article. No one since Calvin Coolidge has deported more people than Obama. some prominent "Mexicans" in the Southwest do not believe the Democrats or the GOP care about them. More important is how much their Wall Street investments(Clintons)

Putin rode in on a wave of Russians dissatisfied with capitalism and cooperation with the West. Putin has said he longs for the time when Russia were stronger. In fact, I believe he has said Western-style capitalism has not been good for Mother Russia. Ever heard of Josef Stalin and his authoritarian regime?

Trump's supporters long for a period when they say America was much stronger: The 1950's and the 1960's. Part of this is wrapped up in a period when America was much more "White."
Trump's refusal to disavow himself of the KKK and White supremacists is enough evidence for me that he tacitly agrees with those groups.

On the issue of cozying up to Putin, Trump runs a great risk of being taken like a fool. This is because Putin is an authoritarian who doesn't like or believe in democracy. He deals in dictatorship where what he says goes.
While Trump has some of the same sociopathic traits, he has yet to demonstrate he is in the same league as a dictator or that he wants a dictatorship.

The only thing someone like a Putin respects is strength and the unwavering resolve to use it if necessary. Bullies do not "make nice," they create conflict. They will only respect someone else because the someone else demands it--and will confront and destroy the bully without hesitation.

In the bully arena, how much REAL blood does Trump have on his hands? How many people has he had killed?

I'm quite certain many people have met their demise on Putin's direct orders.

I think, wkg in b ham, you are under the impression that an American can be friends with Putin. I don't see that as possible in the same way I don't see that America can really be friendly with a Russia controlled by Putin. It's because America and Russia have diametrically opposed political systems. That was not the case of post-Soviet Union Russia before Putin.

Putin is many times more ruthless, Machiavellian, and brutal than Trump.
Putin is used to getting his way and uses military force to get what he wants. Trump has already stated his aim to reduce America's military presence around the world. What kind of opportunity do you think Putin sees in THAT?

I think any American cozies up to Putin at a great risk to American security.

Ever hear of the phrase, "too many cooks in the kitchen?" Do you really think Putin believes in cooperation--other than "cooperation" being what he says?

Trump's not realizing this is both a sign of his "blindness" about international realities and his cozying up to Putin tantamount to high treason.

Bradley, good posts. However the US seems to think the world is its "Burger King" and we have the best bread to make them into a sandwich, American style with Ketshup.
Since the 50's the US CRUSADES have continued trying to make "Regime Change" wherever it pleases, with murderous consequences for millions of people. US administrations and the CIA have the blood of millions of innocent civilians on their hands. Makes me wonder if they have a conscious? The US continues and will under Hillary or Donald, primarily for profit in falsely stating its for democracy.
For your info Bradley:https://consortiumnews.com/2016/08/04/the-danger-of-excessive-trump-bashing/

@ Bradley: Arg. I simply asked for some enlightenment on Putin and Trump being “best buds”. Your nonresponsive essay lays out a new barrage of claims, charges, etc. based on your clairvoyant insights. However I’m still looking for something that indicates they’re “best buds”. They’ve never met or communicated.

Your ramblings would require much more time to address than I want to put in. But there are a couple I can handle quickly. E.g.” Ever heard of Josef Stalin and his authoritarian regime?” As it turns out I have. Did you know the USSR/Stalin were the darlings of far left in the US prior to WWII? Using your logic Hitler and Stalin must have been “best buds” – they were so much alike. They hated each other. The war on the Eastern Front was one of the most bloody and ruthless in history.

How about “Trump's not realizing this is both a sign of his "blindness" about international realities and his cozying up to Putin tantamount to high treason.” Well Putin, so far anyway, is a softie compared the Castro brothers in Cuba. So I suppose cozying up to them is “tantamount to high treason”. I define treason as selling out national interests for personal gain. Jeeze, who would do that?

Trump is indeed a very flawed man. But HRC is flawed to point where words like “evil” apply. This assessment is not based on a hypothetical future, but on her actual history. It’s a lamentable situation where you have to pick between Trump and HRC. I think you have to go with Trump and hope for the best. HRC’s record is one of lacklusterness, failure and duplicity. It’s impossible to like Trump; it’s impossible to look over the HRC oeuvre and hold her anything but contempt.

@Cal: I read the New Yorker “love story” article. It could be summed up as “Bradley with better writing.”

@Cal: I think the crusading thing goes back a lot farther than the 50’s. I’d have to go back to a least the 1890’s when the McKinley/Teddy Roosevelt crowd wanted a colonial empire like the big boys in Europe. Ginned up the Spanish American War to grab Puerto Rico, Cuba, Guam and Philippines’. “Annexing” Hawaii occurred in the same time period. We’ve been war more to less continuously since 1940. It’s insane. Related: between Trump & HRC who are we likely to get “more of the same”?

@Cal re Neocons: I think the movement is on its last legs in the GOP. Not completely rid of them – for example that idiot John McCain is still senator. Tea Party doesn’t seem to have much clout in Az.

For no reason at all: Russian history is just one big tragedy. the highlight where the Gorbochaf (spelling?) Yeltson years – when any improvements in freedom where offset by the systematic looting of the country.

Trump speaks admiringly of Putin and Putin, I believe, has done the same of Trump.

Stalin said, "If Hitler had joined me, we'd be unbeatable." He actually wanted an alliance, and so wanted it that he intentionally ignored the buildup of the Wehrmacht on his western borders. Actually, if you knew of Stalin correctly, he actually admired Hitler--much as the mutual admiration society of Trump and Putin.

Hitler saw the Russians as untermensch, and fit for only hard slave labor to the Reich.

I highly doubt the Castro brothers have the ruthlessness to have ascended through the Russian KGB and political structure as Putin has. Besides, have they ever annexed territory?

The reason its called high treason is that its a more damaging kind of treason, like selling out the country.

I prefer to side with those that think Trump, by being so off-the-wall, somewhat delusional, and prone to vindictiveness, is clearly unfit for the presidency and might create complete chaos. Way too unsettling for me.

@Bradley: I think Trump is far from grand; and no I’m not happy that he’s the GOP nominee. Many here are not happy with HRC being the demo nominee. But we’re both stuck with what we’ve got.

Re Hitler and Stalin. They actually did have an alliance and Poland paid the price for that alliance. The USSR was shipping oil and grain to Germany right up to the day of the invasion. I think Joe got stuck with his pants down. I think he was just blind sided. His intellegence network let him down. The USSR had an excellent intelligence service. Not just in Germany but just about everywhere including the USA. McCarthy was an asshole but he was right about one thing: our government was riddled with Soviet spies.

I can admire certain aspects for people that I really don’t like. I’ll give you two examples. I read BHO’s “Dreams of my Father” and got about 100 pages into it and said to myself “this is really a well written book”. About HRC: she’s a much harder worker than I am even on my best days. She really never stops working.

Stalin did say, "If Hitler and I joined forces, we'd have been unbeatable."

Sounds like more than admiration to me.
Also, Stalin remarked, "One death is a tragedy, one million is a statistic."
I'm sure Stalin admired Hitler's cold-blooded ruthlessness because Stalin had little regard for human life.

It was just a case of too many cooks in the kitchen.

I do think Putin has much more experience internationally than Trump.
If Trump gets into anything with him,
I believe Putin will view him as an easy mark. Lack of respect from an opponent can be dangerous on the international stage.

You think successful presidential leadership hinges on something like "Well, I tried but it was someone else's fault". Let's call that the third grade soccer team approach.

I tend to raise the bar a little higher. I think of FDR, Lincoln, Reagan, LBJ and some others and the things there were able to accomplish. The way that there nonpartisan popularity basically forced others to accept their agenda. Reagan's 1981 historic tax cuts had broad support:http://www.nytimes.com/1981/07/30/politics/30REAG.html

The Obamacare cheerleading from the left fits perfectly with the third grade approach. It was suppose to decrease the deficit.

Change is very attractive, and rebelliousness is part of the American identity.

I just feel, in my 60's liberal heart, that the changes Trump wants are not in keeping with my beliefs in equality for everyone, inclusiveness, and fairness.

That being said, I do wish Sanders were the nominee because he is about upending the system toward it being more egalitarian. But we all know how the conservative paint this: liberal=socialist=Godless communist.
Robin Hood doesn't play well in the "red zone." That these conservatives believe and propagate this is, to me, a convenient and poor excuse for their selfishness--especially when they parade themselves as Christians.

Jesus said, "How you treat the least among me is how you treat me." Pope Francis referenced this in calling out Trump's behavior as not being Christian.

Christian behavior--as Jesus Christ would act--embodies compassion, love, and sacrifice for the common good. These tenets are not unique to Christianity; they are intrinsic to all faiths around the world.

Hillary is hardly a paradiqm of perfection. But of the two candidates, if only to me, she comes much closer to having the compassion, concern, and public decency that define dignity. Yes, I do believe the presidency requires dignity, and that whoever is there is an example not just here, but around the world.

Another thing, men, by their testosterone, are more often to be bellicose, aggressive, and intemperate in crises. Women are, by not having so much testosterone, are more likely to be deliberate in the decision-making process.

I am a feminist by my belief in equality, and I want to see what a woman can do as President. Hillary, by both her experience and demeanor, is more qualified to lead this nation.

It's a white paper, not a bill. It lacks specifics, but it does allow insurers to deny coverage based on pre-existing conditions. This kind of looks like the Republican ethos of, "you're on your own," and a support for business at the expense of the less fortunate.

Want to guess that part of your 8.6% increase is due to insurers covering pre-existing conditions?

8.6 percent sounds like 600 bucks more a year. U can afford that INPHX and still buy 245 Starbucks drinks per year. It's your forced contribution to humanity. I know its not the money it's the forced part.

Well, INPHX there's a place in Idaho, where they defy that forced stuff. And you can hang out with some real helicopter Sarah Palin, Macho Wolf killers. Rumor has it John Birch is still Alive. U will need a Jeep as there is no Amtrack service.

INPHX said, "Cal:I'm glad you're saving some bucks.At the company I work for, this year's proposed increase is 8.6%."

INPHX, Besides being a 76 year old Arizona Republican, a retired cop and working for a Republican governor, I belonged to three different unions and I was a Union President. Would be glad to assist you in negotiating that proposed increase. Unless that offends your individualistic survivor of the fittest philosophy.

It is impossible to know how he would have fared in the general as the Democratic nominee. He faced no Republican attacks because the GOP wanted him to win the nomination. Why? Then he could face the massive GOP attack machine that has been used against Hillary Clinton for 25 years.

After 100 days of SOCIALIST! TAX-AND-SPEND! DEFICITS! And did I mention SOCIALIST!! — it's highly doubtful that a majority of the electorate would have felt the bern.

As I have written before, the reason Bill Clinton was a center-right president was because that was the only way to win in post-1972, post-Reagan America. George McGovern, Ted Kennedy, Mario Cuomo and every other liberal tribune went nowhere. I wish it were different.

Jon, U R probably correct.
But the numbers before Hillary's getting the tin hat showed Bernie doing better against Trump than Hillary. but then those were just guesstimate figures and U know how liars figure.

Try not to divert. Obamacare was pitched as reducing the deficit. I applauded that- an expansion of the safety net that would not add to an already obscene deficit.

Did it?

How can you support it without knowing that? Isn't that a necessary condition for it to be considered a success?

Do costs and revenue matter to you?

Cal: We've already gone a few rounds with the insurance company. We're small so we don't have a lot of pull.

Brad:

Gotta read a little closer:

Ryan's proposal would keep some popular pieces, including not allowing people with pre-existing conditions to be denied coverage and permitting children to stay on their parents' coverage until age 26.

Although I not sure universal health care can be implemented and be efficient and effective, my gut tells me that health care is a right not a privelge.
INPHX,Google Small companies band together to lower health insurance costs. It's in a trial period in some states. Not sure what Arizona legal position on such is?

Jon, thanks for The LA Times (the rag that help kill Gary Webb) piece. SO Sanders talked the party line. No suprises there.
But even better was the link to Presidential candidate Gary Johnson who seems to be at 12 percent of the vote? A dangerous libertarian. I'm forwarding such on to Gary's Pal. Indio Ruben.

To IN PHX: That's in the white paper. It remains to be seen whether that proposal makes it into bill form. And whether, if it is in the bill, that the bill isn't altered in committee or on the floor.

When it's in a bill form, and the Republicans are behind it, I'll believe it.

To IN PHX: When it's on the floor, that will show me the Republicans are serious about something other than "NO!"

There are no other goal posts other than, put it in the black and white of a bill that has everything you've proposed. Show me the money. Then it's no longer a proposal possibly designed to imply you're doing something. Don't imply something; actually DO it!

I think it's a very fair line in the sand--the Republicans actually need to cross it.

And as far as your assertion about a Democrat in the White House being the "naysayer," nobody, including you, knows anything until an actual bill is brought forward. And if the "Democrat" in the White House blocks it, that won't look so good on them, will it?

I will believe the Republicans are not the party of "NO!" when I see them put something positive and concrete as an alternative to Obamacare. Proposals are simply that--and NOT concrete offers that bills are.

After the conservative Republicans have made their money on the cut-rate wages of the "illegals," they want to send them back at the first sign those people might cost them some of their morally ill-gotten gains. Passive-aggressive of just morally delusional? You choose.

Also, do you really believe that Jesus would act as they do toward people of color, women, students, poor people, gays, etc.? You choose.

Brad, I got a laugh out of your testosterone vs estrogen post (testosterone bad, estrogen good). I guess you haven't seen the clip of the compassionate Ms. Clinton lamenting the murder of Gaddafi of Mad Albright dismissing the death of 1/2 million children as worth the price of regime change. Take a lookhttp://www.informationclearinghouse.info/

Hit the link and the clips are on the left.

Jon, Please stop condescending to those of us who can no longer hold our noses and validate bad options. If your fears lead you to voting Clinton then go for it but include me out. I am sick of all the old bs about lesser evils. If you want me to do your bidding on the booth then get to work and give me better options. Too late for this round. Burning my ballot looks like the only way for me to make a meaningful statement.

Now don't get on me about not voting or wasting my vote on a candidate other than the "official" options. It's my vote and I'll cast or not as I see fit in my own interest to make the statement I choose. If allowing the system to rig the game time after time and going along with the results works for you then I think that's a bigger danger than refusing to go along. I have more respect for those who refuse to be a part of that game.

Jon, I miss the signing poetic sage, Soleri.
But I envy him his unharnessed freedom.
“Serious answer” that why I read your intelligent well written blog.
Thus I get more informed but probably not much smarter.
It would be great to have Soleri here to have your back but for now it is what it is.
So again make your mark and I will make mine.

“Testostrone”, Hillary has got more than Obama and Donald combined.
And her body count is more than Obama and Donald combined.
Hail Caesar, Donald Duck and Melania has been exiled to Solvenia.

BF said, "So the questions are do we leave it the way it is, make it better, or worse?"
Guess it depends on where you are and how you define better or worse."

@ RC re “Then he could face the massive GOP attack machine that has been used against Hillary Clinton for 25 years.” Well the Left has a pretty massive attack machine too. If the object of the attack (regardless of who’s doing it) merits the attack, I really don’t have a problem with it. If the attack is based on the slimmest of actual evidence, then it’s not OK.

With Team Clinton it’s been nothing but one thing after another for 25 years. I won’t enumerate them here; the list is simply too lengthy. But there are commonalities; lying, stonewalling, and destroying of evidence just for starters.

The best way to avoid these “attacks” is just to quit skating out on the thin ice.

Trump’s history and every word he has even spoken will be gone over with a fine tooth comb. I’m perfectly OK with that. Anyone running for a significant office or appointment to an important office must expect this. If you issues in the closet, don’t expect them to stay there. The best policy when they revealed (and they will be) is to honestly address them. Some times that’s going be along the lines of “I said/did essentially what is being reported and I wish hadn’t.” Or something along those lines.

The Dems don’t a need vigorous attack squad now, Trump is ruining his campaign with that big, fat mouth of his.

Jon’s right. I’m a righty, and as much as I don’t like it, I’m voting for Trump. If you’re a lefty and are revolted by Trump, voting for anyone besides HRC is senseless.

I ve watched Hillary interviewed a couple of times recently. Where a normal person would have interjected the words , " I apologize or I'm sorry" at that point in her statement, she didn't. She couldn't. Those words are not in her vocabulary. I don't like that.

I'm a big country western music fan. Stand by your man is one of my all time favorite songs.

When Hillary stood by her man, me and most of the country thought two things:

1. Lady, you're dumber than you look.
2. Lady, you just made a deal with the devil for future money and power.

Guess she's not so dumb. However, the devil owns her soul. That's not a trait I look for in a President.

@Cal: Several times you have made statements to the effect “Hillary has blood on her hands”. That can be read in a couple of different ways. One would be in a Bush II way: that stupid war, caused by “Bush lie; people died” sense. Or it could mean she had people aced by hired pros. Any illumination?

I had a conservative Republican friend visit the week of the Democratic Convention. We had a few testy exchanges but got along well for the most part. He's as a decent a human being as I know even if our minds don't always meet.

I noticed the same thing with Facebook friends who post pro-Trump memes. With the exception of one vile "friend", soon defriended, who posted a GIF that showed Hillary vomiting feces, I know them as good people who for want of better or more complete information somehow think Trump is qualified to be president. They didn't arrive at this delusion because they're racists or bigots. They got there because of their media, which sells a dream called we are right, they are wrong.

This points out the problem in a forum like this with persuasion. I know through sad experience the insanity of the effort. Most people are not persuadable on subjects like this. There's simply too much media telling them what they want to believe. For example, that Hillary Clinton is this horrible liar and that Donald Trump is an overachieving titan unlike any who ever lived. That he is, even for a developer, unusually untethered to basic ethics and ordinary conscience somehow gets lost in the reality-TV show that is his life. He's a consummate showman.

Lying, on the other hand, is a bit more nebulous sin. I take it as a given that we all lie even though most of us are so practiced at it that we're not even aware of what we're doing. I lie but the awareness is usually late arriving and only after I'm prompted to ponder something I said because of some pushback. But, more often than not, differences about the truth come down to opinions and the individual's memory. Trump, on the other hand, because he has seemingly intractable psychological and/or neurological impairments, will say brazenly false things like Ted Cruz's father being part of the JFK assassination, or that Muslims in New Jersey cheered the destruction on 9/11. Is Trump even aware that these statements are lies? If he doesn't have the requisite consciousness to feel remorse or simply say he's sorry, can it be said he's even responsible or compos mentis?

We're talking past each other for the most part and we can't remedy this situation because of a) our individualized media menu and b) our reflexive need to defend it as truthful. It goes without saying that no one has a corner on truth. It's why we double-check one another and have multiple and protracted debates about "what matters most" to us. There's no clear path to the Truth, let alone evidence that Truth as a set of beliefs exists. We live, rather, in an age of "truthiness". As one Bush 43 administration aide once boasted, "when we act, we create our own reality". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality-based_community

I think a lot about our consensus reality and why it's so fragile. We are, it seems, tribal creatures who think in terms of good guys and bad guys. Politics is fundamentally irrational for that reason. I noticed this acutely during the Bernie wildfire how young people who couldn't spell de Tocqueville were suddenly lecturing everyone on the necessity of revolution. By the same token, the Trump revolt shocked many of us because we thought the Republican Party was a top-down organization that would never allow the nomination of someone so grotesquely unsuited for high office. All of us have a fathomless capacity for self-delusion. What this election is really about is whose social reality we prefer to inhabit. I prefer kinder to cruder and smarter to dumber. It's not that I want paradise on Earth or reason triumphant. No, I'll take the small improvements where I can find them in a species stranded between the stars and mud.

@Cal re HRC “blood on hands”: Even though she’s hired thugs to harass and intimidate the women who accused Bill of sexual misdeeds there’s no evidence or even suggestion of murder. I already know more about HRC than I really care to – I’m not digging into her history any more.

Related on the Vince Foster death: “Crisis of Character” offers the best explanation I’ve read. Foster committed suicide due to the mental and emotion stress of dealing with HRC as first lady.

Many positive words could be used to describe HRC; relentless and tireless for example. “Kind” is not one of them.